excess above the three months which elapsed between the oath and the departure of Antipater for Rome; a week between sending off the first and second letters and deputation; and perhaps a week between the completion of the collection of the evidence, and the arrival of Antipater and his trial at Jerusalem. These fractions may altogether amount to somewhat more than a month, which, added to the other nine, gives a little more than ten months, as the utmost period which intervened between the oath and the commencement of Herod's illness on the 13th of February, J. P. 4710. Hence it appears, that the oath took place a little more than ten months before the 13th of February, J. P. 4710. Now the 13th of February, J. P. 4710-10 months=13th of April, J. P. 4709. This computation, therefore, assigns to the oath the very same date which our previous and independent reasonings have concluded to be the most probable date of our Saviour's nativity. Therefore the oath and the taxing being the same, and Christ being born during the taxing, that conclusion is confirmed. Yet is the computation not absolutely adverse to those who would place them either in May or March; a little more or a little less time than we have allowed for might have been easily consumed in the events which succeeded each other, and our computation

may not therefore be free from all inaccuracy. But of this I feel tolerably secure, that the error, as to any important purposes to which we may wish to apply the date, will be found altogether immaterial. It will still fix the nativity of Jesus to the early part of J. P. 4709.

SECTION IV.

An Objection to the Correctness of the preceding Calculations and Date considered and answered.

I AM aware of only one objection which can be fairly urged against the correctness of the preceding calculations, and it may be stated in the following terms.

When Antipater was sent to Rome by his father, Josephus states that "together with Antipater there went to Rome Syllæus the Arabian," who was accused of several things by Antipater and Aretas. Josephus then proceeds to relate the origin of these accusations, and mentions Corinthus and two other Arabians, accomplices of Syllæus, who had been seized and examined and confessed themselves guilty before Herod.-Herod had informed Saturninus of every thing, and "so Saturninus," (says Josephus,) "upon Herod's discovering the whole to him, sent them to Rome."a

a

Joseph. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 4. p. 586, 587. See also de Bell. Jud. lib. i. cap. 18. p. 764.

It is argued from this passage that Saturninus was actually President of Syria when Antipater set off for Rome, because his name is mentioned by Josephus after this departure.-But, according to our calculations, Antipater did not leave Judea for Rome until about three months after the taking of the oath, that is, until about the month of June, J. P. 4709, at which time Varus, and not Saturninus, was President of Syria. Our cal

b

b

Chronologers have entertained very different sentiments about the period at which Varus became President of Syria, but the question has been set at rest for ever by Pagi, who has fixed the year by a careful comparison of some coins of Varus with others of Tiberius, from the latter of which he has determined, with a precision and certainty that are irresistible, the true commencement of the Antiochian era.

1. There are in existence some coins of Varus, as President of Syria, which bear date in the 25th year of the Antiochians, and this is the earliest date that has been found upon any of his coins. Hence it may be concluded that he was made President in, and not before, the 25th year of that era, because the commencement of the government of Kings and Presidents was usually marked by the honour of an immediate coinage. The treatises upon coins contain some rather curious effects of the extreme haste of the masters of the mints to celebrate the accession of a new ruler, more especially in the provinces. These effects consist in joining the reverse of a preceding reign to an obverse bearing the head of the new-raised Governor. It is therefore to be supposed that the 25th year of the Antiochians was the first of the Presidency of Varus, because the first coins of Varus are dated in that year. There are coins in existence which prove, beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the era of Antioch began on the day of the battle of Actium, that is, Sept. 2, J. P. 4683.-Now J. P. 4683+25=J. P. 4708. Therefore Varus became President of

2.

Syria

culations, therefore, it may be said, are incorrect, because they contradict the statement of Josephus, by making Varus instead of Saturninus President of Syria at the time of Antipater's departure for Rome.

The following remarks will, I think, entirely remove this objection:

1. We may observe that the word them, under which Josephus comprehends all those who were sent by Saturninus to Rome, refers only to Corinthus and the two other Arabians, the accomplices of Syllæus, and by no means includes Syllæus himself. Those accomplices might therefore have been sent to Rome by Saturninus some time before Syllæus accompanied Antipater. I very much question indeed whether Saturninus could, under any circumstances, have had the power of thus disposing of Syllæus. Syllæus had been the principal minister of Obodas the late king of Arabia, and would seem by that office to have been completely out of the jurisdiction of the President of Syria.

2. Though the circumstance of these accomplices of Syllæus having been sent to Rome

Syria before the 2d of Sept. J. P. 4708, and after the 2d of Sept. J. P. 4707. See Pagi Appar. Chronol. in Bar. p. 33, and Crit. in Bar. p. 14.